Citation network
Gray Vs. Mississippi
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 18, 1987
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 648 (1987) U.S. Supreme Court Gray v. MississippiSearch
-
U.S. 648 (1987) Gray v. MississippiSearch
-
U.S. 648 Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi Syllabus Under Witherspoon V. IllinoisSearch
-
opposition to the death penalty would prevent or substantially impair the performance of their duties as jurors. Davis v. GeorgiaSearch
-
III-B-2, in which JUSTICE BRENNAN, JUSTICE MARSHALL, and JUSTICE STEVENS join. More than 10 years ago, in Davis v. GeorgiaSearch
-
on certiorari summarily reversed a judgment of a state court and ruled that, when a trial court misapplies Witherspoon v. IllinoisSearch
-
in part by the trial court's failure to follow the voir dire guidelines for capital cases set forth in Armstrong v. StateSearch
-
challenge. Id. at 424. In the dissent's view, the majority's reasoning was invalid because, under Davis v. GeorgiaSearch
-
S. 522 , n. 21. We have reexamined the Witherspoon rule on several occasions, one of them being Wainwright v. WittSearch
-
Id. at 469 U. S. 424 , quoting Adams v. TexasSearch
-
We did not have occasion to revisit the Witherspoon issue during the period between the decision in Furman v. GeorgiaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U. S. 238 (1972), and Branch v. TexasSearch
-
decided with Furman, where Georgia and Texas death sentences were invalidated, and the decisions in Gregg v. GeorgiaSearch
-
guaranteed by the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments. Peremptory challenges are not of constitutional origin. See Batson v. KentuckySearch
-
Stilson v. UnitedSearch
-
emphasis in original). Moore v. EstelleSearch
-
The judgment of the Supreme Court of Georgia that was reversed in Davis rested on a similar analysis. See Davis v. StateSearch
-
S. 123 . The State nevertheless urges us to apply the constitutional harmless error analysis formulated in Chapman v. CaliforniaSearch
-
U. S. 18 (1967), and affirm petitioner's death sentence. In Davis v. StateSearch
-
Ga. at 809, 225 S.E.2d at 244, quoting Witherspoon v. IllinoisSearch
-
Because the Witherspoon-Witt standard is rooted in the constitutional right to an impartial jury, Wainwright v. WittSearch
-
be it judge or jury, is such a right. Id. at 386 U. S. 23 , n. 8, citing, among other cases, Tumey v. OhioSearch
-
U.S. at 391 U. S. 521 , quoting Fay v. NewSearch
-
does not have the same precedential effect as does a case decided upon full briefing and argument. See, e.g., Edelman v. JordanSearch
-
can be exercised without articulating reasons, id. at 145-147, subject to constitutional limitations. See Batson v. KentuckySearch
-
Although the prosecutor at Gray's trial did not refer expressly to this Court's decision in Witherspoon v. IllinoisSearch
-
the Court twice reaffirmed its holding in brief opinions demonstrating its correct application. See Boulden v. HolmanSearch
-
U. S. 478 , 394 U. S. 481 -484 (1969), and Maxwell v. BishopSearch
-
had recognized, however, the full import of the constitutional mandate expressed in Witherspoon. In Marion v. BetoSearch
-
penalty. In re Anderson, 69 Cal.2d 613, 618-620, 447 P.2d 117, 121-122 (1968), cert. denied sub nom. Anderson v. CaliforniaSearch
-
where, as here, the trial court's findings are dependent on an apparent misapplication of federal law, Rogers v. RichmondSearch
-
So.2d at 421, quoting Armstrong v. StateSearch
-
In People v. BernetteSearch
-
This Court summarily reversed the Illinois Supreme Court's judgment. 403 U.S. 947 (1971). See also Wigglesworth v. OhioSearch
-
Other opinions expressly rejecting the unexercised peremptory argument are numerous. In Moore v. EstelleSearch
-
Hance v. ZantSearch
-
Blankenship v. StateSearch
-
Grijalva v. StateSearch
-
In State v. AdamsSearch
-
Id. at 680-681, 458 P.2d at 576. This Court summarily reversed. 403 U.S. 947 (1971). See also Wigglesworth v. OhioSearch
-
U.S. 947 (1971), rev'g 18 Ohio St.2d 171, 248 N.E.2d 607 (1969), and Harris v. TexasSearch
-
Under our recent decision in Batson v. KentuckySearch
-
Campbell L.Rev. 71 (1986). JUSTICE POWELL, concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. In Davis v. GeorgiaSearch
-
voir dire questioning, finally stated explicitly that she would carry out her duty as a juror. Cf. Wainwright v. WittSearch
-
quoting Adams v. TexasSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Gray v. MississippiSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial